By Ben Langlotz
|
July 15, 2025
|
Firearms Industry Advice, Legal News, Opinion Pieces
|
0 Comments
ARE YOU READY FOR THE SILENT EARTHQUAKE?
Can Ending a $200 Tax Transform the Industry?
Just like that, the $200 transfer tax on suppressors (and SBRs etc.) is gone. Without much fanfare Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill repealed a tax that may prove to have been the primary roadblock to innovation and economic success.
I won’t weigh in on the Elon perspective that the Bill spends too much (I tend to agree with Elon), or whether gun rights organizations fumbled the change to end all registration (they probably did fine getting what they did). But the question is: How big of a difference will a tax reduction make.
I predict the impact will be big. I believe that mere “paperwork” (the headaches of fingerprints and LEO permission can be perceived by buyers as trivial, if framed properly by companies in our industry. I understand that ATF is approving transfers rapidly, so the long-delayed gratification seems to have ended. Without the tax, all that’s left is the paperwork. Getting fingerprints is only a minor inconvenience, and law enforcement sign-off can be framed as not much worse than a visit to the DMV. Just a couple boxes to tick. I’ll leave it to the top marketing geniuses to frame the remaining hoops to jump through as merely a little purchasing ritual.
No tax means:
- Cost to purchaser is significantly lower, especially at the low end. Lowering prices tends to massively increase the Total Available Market. The market for suppressors that can be profitably sold for, say, $200 without a tax is far bigger than the market for the same product that costs the consumer $400 with the old tax.
- Resale of a suppressor is almost unthinkable, until now. Probably very few people will resell suppressors, and the used market might be nearly non-existent for years. But, the psychology might lead buyers to open their wallets knowing that they can always resell if they don’t like it. That safety blanket is like when I tell gun newbies not to worry if they buy the wrong gun, as long as it’s a popular model from a good brand, they can always trade it in or sell it for a decent price.
- It’s easy to imagine some scenarios in which innovators might not mind filing forms, but are liberated by not having to pay $200 when they shorten a barrel or print a bunch of different baffle designs (I’m not a regulator, so ask an expert how this works under the new law).
- Cheap, cheaper, cheapest. I envision a market for a $20 suppressor. Maybe disposable suppressors. Maybe a pack of 20 disposable suppressors for $200 (and 20 forms to file). Or something else. Why not one for a bedside pistol that’s good for maybe a magazine and is designed to fail controllably by blowing any fragments only toward the target.
As you can see, the common mistake is merely in predicting how consumers will respond (how much will demand increase with everything $200 cheaper?), without also asking how inventors and manufacturers will respond to the new environment (what new products will be developed?)
The same analysis can be applied to SBRs and AOWs. I hear again and again that an inventor wants to delay investment in a patent application until they get ATF classification that is favorable, so customers don’t need to pay the tax. A taxed product can be unviable, and not worth patenting. Now, some of those designs might become viable even if the paperwork is required.
Branding slogan to consider: “It’s worth the paperwork to (protect your hearing/have a compact design for home defense)”
Back in late 2015, optimists were imagining Trump getting elected and scrapping all the regulations on suppressors. Here are excerpts of what I wrote then (I can’t believe this was 10 years ago!):
Capturing the future in a Can
They call it the “Hearing Protection Act.” Not only is it an exciting possibility to expand gun rights, but it’s a fantastic illustration of how you should ready your business for revolutionary changes.
It’s not unusual to see tantalizing proposals for legislation that promises to expand our gun rights. They usually go nowhere. But there’s one proposal that has hit the news that might just be the right thing at the right time. The typical reaction to this no-brainer proposal from industry insiders and knowledgeable shooters is: “It’s about @*!#& time!”
Currently, suppressors fill a small market of rich and patient guys who enjoy cool and controversial toys. To buy, they have to pay high prices for small production, a $200 tax, endure paperwork headaches and a wait that can be the better part of a year until one gets his hands on the toy he paid for. That’s a pretty small market. It turns out to be about 500,000 per year.
Imagine expanding that market to every hunter, plinker, target shooter, home defense buyer, and even concealed carrier. Imagine if the process of buying was as easy as buying a pistol, the gear was in stock to take home today, it was essentially tax free, and the price was a fraction of today’s prices. The market might increase by more than a factor of ten, and perhaps much more at the outset as a hundred million gun owners decided to protect their ears.
There was a day when the average person thought suppressors were for criminals, like in the old movies. There was also a day when the average person thought that anyone concealing a handgun must be a criminal. Times change, and perceptions change. I hazily recall only about a dozen years ago when the venerable Jonathan Arthur Ciener (he’s a reader, and will probably hate that I described him as “venerable”) shared with me at the SHOT Show that one of the most successful marketing campaigns he’s ever run was a small ad in Shotgun News that read “Silencers are Legal.” Another old can-maker pal of mine told me how back then yokels would come up to his gun show suppressor table and helpfully advise: “D’awww, don’ cha ya know, those things are Eee-legal!”
Suppressors go Mainstream
I believe that given the millions of suppressors sold since those days, and with the mainstream advertising of suppressors that sound suppression has gone mainstream. When my wife Karmen took her first pistol training class a few years back (she’s from Estonia, which lacks a gun culture) the instructor started her with a suppressed 22 pistol. The lack of recoil and sound meant she didn’t develop a flinch, and she could do without hearing protection and better hear the instructor. Once she mastered the basics, she was gradually and comfortably moved up into larger calibers and unsuppressed pistols – with suitable hearing protection.
Suppressors are so mainstream that one of my gun-nut lawyer pals who’s still uncertain about open carry rights is an avid can collector. Also, I just started typing “Hearing…” into Google, and the second suggestion was “Hearing Protection Act.” This is not obscure industry-insider stuff anymore. Even the NRA is openly advocating for the Act.
The right to muffle is such a commonsense concept that even an extreme anti-gunner would have few arguments to make. I’m probably dreaming to think that Obama would sign a law, but it’s easy to imagine a President Trump signing the Hearing Protection Act – one of the best-named bills I’ve heard in a long time.
Are You Ready for the Revolution?
When the landscape changes, some businesses adapt, some suffer, and others thrive. If you aren’t ready for change, you’ll probably suffer.
The simple reaction to this possible legal reform would be to conclude that if the new law passes, existing suppressor companies will be well-positioned to drastically increase their sales and profits. Other companies will enter the market to get part of the new customer base.
Currently, you can buy a cheap can for under $500, and a pricey one for over $1000. I believe that legal reform would lead to entirely new segments of the market. If the transaction cost were no more than a background check, then there’s no limit to how low prices can go. When suppressors were a $5 hardware store item back in the 1930s, a new $200 tax caused demand to drop to zero. In fact, it was years before the first tax was collected on a suppressor after the de facto ban was enacted. Removing the tax might just jolt the market nearly back to the $5 hardware store days.
The $200 tax and other headaches mean that only high-value suppressors are profitable, and these are produced at relatively low production volumes. That will change.
I can imagine a disposable plastic suppressor (one time use, perhaps) that costs a few dollars to make, and a few more bucks to buy. Maybe it doesn’t suppress much, but it keeps you from damaging your ears in a defensive shooting with your carry gun. Maybe your home defense AR-15 has a pop-bottle adapter, or a full plastic can that’s just strong enough to survive one magazine without blowing up in your own face.
The innovation challenge is: What will $49 suppressors look like? How can you make something that suppresses some sound without risking injury to the owner at minimal cost? The answer won’t be titanium or precision machining. But the answer might very well be patentable!
And before you envy the current suppressor market leaders, consider this: What will happen to the market when Smith and Wesson decides that it’s time to make their own cans? If it’s just another assembly of machined parts (even a durable lifetime suppressor) it costs little to make, and adds tremendously to the value of a pistol. Maybe Ruger will look to buy an existing suppressor company for its expertise, but I don’t think reputation will be a big factor in the new market. Go down to a public gun range and ask an average guy what suppressor companies he can name – you won’t get many answers.
- Innovation will take off as tinkerers will no longer live in fear of 10 years in Club Fed for ordinary experimentation and prototyping.
- Barrel threading and replacement barrels will be big business.
- Anyone who invents a way to practically attach a suppressor to a conventional pistol without an extended threaded barrel will make a fortune. With hundreds of millions of firearms to suppress in this nation alone, it’s a monumental market to go after.
- It might be worth the trouble for someone to suppress a revolver. Enclose the entire cylinder but sealing the cylinder gap blast – reloading might be slowed, but those who carry a revolver without spare ammo won’t care.
- Inventing a way to integrally suppress a conventional semi-auto pistol will be a revolution. Can the space in the slide be used as an expansion chamber?
- Flash hider and muzzle brake development will be unleashed because designers will no longer fear the regulatory consequences of quieting the report while reducing flash or recoil.
- A new market may open up for very compact noise reducers that make indoor shooting with hearing protection more comfortable. Many indoor ranges may require some form of suppression, and outdoor ranges may also require suppression at least during certain hours, or on certain ranges.
- Welcome back wipes, window screen, and steel wool. What’s old is new again. What made economic sense without the millstone of regulation might make sense again. Wipes that wear out may no longer be regulated parts, but would simply be replacement parts. The law will need to decide what is the serialized “frame” of the suppressor – my bet is on the threaded muzzle adapter.
- Some suppressors will be designed so flimsily that they’ll have a high failure rate, but it will be an acceptable failure mode if your $20 Tupperware can fails by shooting a few light parts downrange, like a shotshell wad.
- Did anyone mention 3D printers? What better way to create a monolithic shape with intricate internal details!
When I told Karmen about this new law, and that I was going to write about it in the newsletter, she scoffed: “You just want them to invent things so you can patent them!” Ok maybe – guilty as charged. But I’d rather my clients and readers be the leaders in the great wave of suppressor inventions than all your competitors.
I’ve often said this before: If you know of a new technology (or regulatory change) that could transform your market, the thing to do is to get your best people together in a room, perhaps with some adult beverages, and have a freewheeling creative session in which you come up with all the possibilities of what the future will look like. If you come up with a few really good ideas, you could actually patent them now. A provisional application gives you a year to rethink it at nearly no cost, and gains you the critical First-to-File status. If you think that no one else was already thinking about these ideas, they are now.
Keep in mind that what you apply to patent doesn’t need to be legal or marketable yet. And you certainly don’t need CAD drawings or a working prototype.
“Brand”-New Technology
All these new developments and new market segments will be ripe for new branding strategies. An old $1500 titanium suppressor deserves an imposing and impressive trademark suggesting durability and precision. But a $49 plastic suppressor is a different animal. PuffMuff, PopFart and PewMin are silly examples, and that’s just the onomatopoetic letter P. These are weak examples, and I’ll save my best branding efforts for my clients that need my help. In the new market, suppressors won’t be “cool” any more. They’ll be popular, fun, essential, healthy and responsible. Which sounds like I’m advertising some new breakfast cereal – which is an example of how the smart marketers who break out of old ways of thinking will wisely look at the market.
Don’t forget domains. Pistol companies should grab the appropriate domains like springfieldsuppressors.com. Remember that the market will broaden by a factor of 10 or more, to people who never even thought about owning a suppressor. When you generate new technology, you generate new brands, which means new domains.
The key is that when you see changes on the horizon, only leaders who continue to innovate aggressively will keep their lead, while upstarts will have a grand opportunity to knock off the big boys. Let me know the great ideas you have for a new quiet generation of shooting!
